Action-packed: Sony a6500 review

The Sony a6500 is the company's top-tier APS-C mirrorless model, a 24MP stills and video camera with image stabilization. It sits above the similar-looking a6300 in Sony's lineup, adding touchscreen capability and stabilization for enthusiasts willing to dig a little deeper into their pockets.

Key Features:

24MP APS-C CMOS sensor with 425 phase detection points

2.36M-dot OLED EVF

Tilting rear touchscreen

5-axis in-body image stabilization

11 fps continuous shooting for up to 300 JPEGs / 100 Raws

1/4000 sec maximum shutter speed

As should be apparent, many of its core specifications are shared with the a6300 - itself a DPReview Gold winning camera. The biggest differences are the touchscreen, the image stabilization and a 'Front End LSI' (processing chip) to allow faster and more complex processing. There are also a few small tweaks, such as the addition of a highlight spot metering mode.

The touch sensitivity of the rear screen can be used for your choice of two things: as an touchscreen for positioning the focus point or triggering focus and shutter, or as a touchpad, when the camera is held to your eye.

The added processing oomph promises a more responsive camera: one that allows immediate image review even when shooting bursts of images. The a6500 also gains a much-needed update to Sony's menu system, adding color-coding to make it easier to recognize and remember different parts of the menu.

This change to the menu, and the addition of a quick way of setting AF point immediately address two of our biggest frustrations with the a6300. However, Sony is making no claims about improvements in terms either of rolling shutter or of recording longevity. With the most recent firmware, the a6300 can often record 4K video for the full 29:59 duration that the camera allows but this is not always possible in warm conditions or if you've just shot a long clip. Sony only claims 'about 20 minutes' of 4K recording for both cameras.

The a6500 uses the same form factor as both the mid-range a6300 and the entry-level a6000

Despite being positioned significantly further up the market, the a6500 uses the same form factor (and dial arrangement) as both the mid-range a6300 and the entry-level a6000. Although all three cameras have two control dials, they are arranged so that both must be controlled using the thumb and, for many people, requiring the hand to be repositioned when switching from one to the other. Such a limitation is reasonable at the a6000 end of the market but seems an odd fit for a $1400 camera.

The other similarity with the 6300 that seems even more odd at this level is Sony's decision to only offer lossy compressed Raw, limiting their processing latitude.

This table compares how the a6500 compares with Fujifilm's fairly similarly-priced X-T2 (probably the most capable rival in terms of stills and video shooting).

"One very impressive feature is the ability to autofocus third party lenses. However, you lose access to all Lock-on AF modes, and burst rates are limited to 3 fps with AF."Seriously? Can't pretty much ANY ILC autofocus compatible third-party lenses? What's so "impressive" about this? And frame rates drop to a measly 3fps if you mount, say, a Sigma E-mount lens? Are you kidding me? I've never heard of such an absurd and arbitrary limitation with any other ILC.

"The a6500 retains more detail than the a6300, and similar levels compared to the Fuji X-T2 but with less noise." - well, judging by the studio comparison samples, side-by-side, the Fuji is a tad less sharp, but considerably cleaner at anything above ISO 6400 (and slightly cleaner below it), for the most part due to the lack of chroma noise (even if the luminance noise levels are comparable).

If A6500 had at least front and back comman dials like all Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus have, I would buy it and forget about Fuji. It's a shame - top Sony APS-C has poorest camera control and does not offer direct access to many important features, incuding shutter speed and aperture, the base in photography. So it's exellent toy, but not exellent photography tool.

'the lack of a second top plate control dial on a $1400 MSRP camera is hard to stomach.'

The Canon 1DxII has only one top plate control dial and it costs 6 grand. The Sony system is identical to Canon - one wheel on top and a thumbwheel at the back and yet Sony gets a sledging and I have never heard Canon criticised once in all the years they've been doing it. An example of some of the irrational thinking that underpins this review.

The style is reminiscent of the A7II test, where the archetype that the camera was being judged against shifted depending on the feature being assessed. Here we get lots of criticism on the handling as if the camera were being compared to a DSLR, then the claim that the reviewer is not impressed by the IBIS, where the camera is suddenly compared to Micro 4/3.

The reviewer knows he's being unfair, because he writes: 'Of course both the cameras mentioned use smaller sensors, which in theory should be easier to move around.'

Contd.Yet he still leaves the comment in, which makes him look like he's got an agenda.

And this sentence should never appear in a review: 'But for the rest of us, picking up a Sony for the first time can feel confusing, frustrating and uninspiring.'

I've never felt that way about Sony, only about cameras from other brands. Perhaps tone down the special pleading? There's nothing uniquely frustrating or uninspiring about Sony cameras - in fact the A6500 clearly offers photographic opportunities missing from lower specced bodies. You just sound biased.

Yes some of the anti-Sony rhetoric by DPR reviews is tiring. They don’t bang on about how tiny this camera is compared to it’s capabilities and how much of a tiny marvel. They simply choose the ‘best’ in each category and moan it doesn’t beat it. Sony products, it seems, MUST exceed all other models in all categories in order for it to be considered good.

The Canon system is not the same as Sony's. The key distinction being that both of the a6500's dials have to be controlled with the same digit. We'd criticise it on any brand, especially at this price.

The reviewer doesn't 'know he's being unfair,' he's acknowledging that it would be harder for Sony to achieve, to give context to the criticism. It's entirely reasonable to compare a camera to the best performance available in its peers: if you need IS, we should point out that you get better results from a Micro Four Thirds camera, if you want direct access ergonomics, you will find it in most rivals (not just DSLRs) at this price.

Given how often I read comments convinced we're being paid-off by Sony, it's entertaining to be accused of anti-Sony rhetoric. We're a review site, we test and use cameras and tell people what we find. If the criticism isn't relevant to you, discount it, but don't expect us to ignore what we believe to be shortcomings.

Thanks for that Richard, now if you would just point me to the section in the review of my X-T2 that you criticise its lack of in body IS (or its effectiveness) and for the D500? That would be great because I can't seem to see it?

Also would you mind pointing me to the section in the D500 review where you don't just gloss over the massive size and weight of the D500 and how it makes you far less likely to carry the camera with you regularly and is disappointing compared to its peers and makes one 'uninsipired' to shoot it? That would be really great!

While we are at it could I have the sections on where my X-T2 is 'fiddly' and 'uninspiring' due to its confusing use of dual partially redundant control points?

Lastly I hope you are working on a review of the Leica M10 at the moment as I will definitely be looking to upgrade my Leica at some point, can you please make sure you point out how ineffective the IBIS is compared to the E-M1 II, how slow the autofocus is compared to the D850 and D5, how terrible the video is compared to the GH5 and how small the lens selection is compared to the 1DX II. Oh and definitely make it very clear that you are disappointed by only having one top control dial on a $6k camera :)

As for Canon not being the same, you still have to take your thumb from its resting position, significantly readjust your grip, and move it down to adjust the rear dial. Does it make much difference that the thumbs rearming position is on a dial to begin with? Do you regularly adjust both dials at exactly the same time, simultaneously adjusting aperture and shutter speed? Or is it more that moving your thumb away from (and altering your grip) its resting position to adjust a setting that makes it less ideal? Are you aware that you can customise it to 'press and turn' rather than use the dial? This is not something you can do on a Canon because you can't comfortably press the top plate buttons with your index finger and control the front dial with the same finger. So you are forced to use the rear dial.

@RichardHaving stated many times that the site under you and your colleagues is better than it's ever been and that I would even pay for access to it, I don't think we need to go down the 'paid off by manufacturers' route. I am not accusing anyone of being anti-Sony or even of conscious bias.

The A6500 review is actually very good and is consistent and seems fair - apart from the points I raised. You do make the distinction that the two dials need to be controlled with the same digit - and that does make it less usable, true, but there is more to say about the absence of the front dial.

The Sony A6xxx bodies are the only ILCs Sony has made since they first started producing DSLRs in 2006 without a front thumbwheel. Every other model has had one. The reason is that the series grew iteratively out of a much simpler (and smaller) camera - the NEX5.

You're smart guys, what's the point of talking about the handling and the price as if this camera just dropped out of the sky when in fact it is an evolution of a much humbler model?

Adding a thumbwheel to the design is probably impossible - even for Sony - without essentially junking the mould and starting again. Sure they could do that, but then you wouldn't have had the NEX6. 7, A6000 and A6300. Had the A6500 been conceived as an individual standalone product and not grown like the branch of a tree it would have a body like the A7 series - a design that Canon copied almost exactly with it's late-to-the-party M5.

Now, I don't mean that you should cut Sony slack on any handling deficiencies because of this, but just consider how Sony is filling-in the map as they go and that most of their competitors haven't even left the docks.

Sony created an entirely new kind of camera when the made the NEX5 - which wasn't very good, but essentially gave birth to the FF mirrorless cameras we have now. Talking about the A6500's handling as if it was a Nikon D500 or 80D seems slightly ignorant to me. These cameras are literally rubber stamped from an archetype designed thirty years ago.

For a simple image of Sony's achievement just imagine the A6500 or A9 as a Canon and Nikon product. You can't, really. You wrote a very good article on why a possible Canon FF mirrorless was unlikely to use EF mount. (Sadly it was destined to fall on the deafest ears in photography). But there isn't a FF Canon mirrorless, and there isn't likely to be one in the near future either. In a very real way you can't compare the A6500 to a m43 or DSLR - certainly not a composite camera, which you can't actually buy - which is what the review does. You do it in your comment as well, when you say; 'If you need IS (...) '.

Everyone 'needs' IS, but it is not going to be the sole driver of which system you choose. The idea that there will be a user who might be considering the D500, A6500 and EM5II is not really credible. I realise that this is essentially a foil for you to write the review, but it has the unfortunate effect of coming down extra harshly on an innovative camera like the A6500. This I believe is what CCD above is alluding to in his comment that Sony is required to exceed the achievements of other manufacturers.

This brings me to IBIS, which is a very sore point for most Sony users. It first appeared in a DSLR in 2004. Yet its continued and baffling absence in Nikon and Canon DSLRs has never raised the peep of a Con in review. Criticising the A6500's IBIS - still the only IBIS in an aps-c mirrorless one year after its introduction - for not being as good as that of M43 seems simply unfair, when no-one else is criticised for not having it.

It's hard not to shake the sense that if Nikon had it and not Sony, it's absence on other brands would be mentioned in every review.

And as I said, the A6500 review (although it is much better) reminded me of the A7II review which was also a first with IBIS - the first full frame mirrorless. For many of us this was the narrative - the chance to get stabilised images from some of the legacy lenses that we had as well as lenses from other brands. It made the camera seem particularly desirable. Instead the review was haunted by the D750, with which it was compared and found wanting in terms of it's sensor. Of course the Nikon was not slated for not having IBIS or the ability to use lenses from other brands. Again the comparison was presented as valid as many possible A7II users would also be considering the D750. I simply don't accept that. Rishi once remarked that perhaps that review needed 'another look.'

For sure, Canon cripples their cameras, as does Nikon to a lesser degree, but it is obvious why in those cases. What is frustrating about Sony is that they cripple their cameras for no obvious reason, other than perhaps they just don't care about usability, but rather only specs. I find it very frustrating; I came and looked up this review seriously interested in an a6500, and yet again am disappointed by Sony and am no longer interested. So, you saved me some money in rental trying out the system...but push me back toward the a7Riii, which seems to have finally gotten all the important stuff about right, except for the touchscreen, which is still a massive fail.

Very comprehensive and useful review, except for one critical issue that is almost a deal-breaker for this camera, if the situation is the same as for the a6300: sensor cleaning: the in-built sensor cleaning is close to useless. If you manage to have stubborn dirt on the sensor, which can happen easily when changing lenses in various environments, Sony wants you to send the camera to an authorized service center to have the sensor cleaned. But what if there are none anywhere near where you need to use the camera? Sony steadfastly and quite rudely, refuses to provide ANY information to customers about what fluid, swabs and procedure should be used for self-cleaning the sensor. This makes me suspect an issue with the sensor coating or the cleaning materials THEY use that they don't want customers to know about. Sad situation, impairs usability and very bad management of customer relations.

What lens was used on the test scene with the a6500? Somehow on these reviews, the issue on the test scene is extremely subjective because of the lens. I mean, for example look at the RX1, RX1-R and RX1RII. I dont know if it was the setup, or bad samples, or what.. but from corner to corner, their test scenes is a tragic blur and sharpness misery! But this is completely inaccurate! I have an RX1R and the Carl Zeiss 35mm f:/2.0 lens is pitch sharp on mine.. NOTHING to do with the IQ horror on the DPreview's test scene. So, what's up with that?

All this said, and the reason why I am curious as to what lens was used on this review of the a6500, is because I gotta say, the a6500 sure has among the best JPG output Ive seen. It certainly kills my RX1R's miserable JPG output and even when compared on this review to the a7RII, it totally rival's it in term of apparent detail resolving power. Amazing JPG engine!

If you click on the [ i ] tab underneath each close-up sample on the test scene, it should tell you which lens was used.

The RX1 lens doesn't produce a very field of focus, especially at relatively close working distances so it looks worse shooting a flat target than it would for more distant subjects arranged at different depths. There's not much we can do about this, other than mention in in the review text.

This is an update on my experience with the A6500. May Day is Lei Day in Hawaii, complete with Hula shows etc. My wife performs. So I video and take pictures each year. This year, first time, I took a lot of photos with my new A6500 and Zeiss 16-70 F4 lens. My settings were Continuous center spot autofocus and multi frame set at medium speed. Lens speeds about 1/500 f5.6. 100 ISO. Shot 276 pix in 40 minutes... astonishing...every shot in perfect focus. I have more beautiful shots of not only my wife but others in her whole group...than I possibly hoped. Hours to sort through them. I set my camera two clicks toward blue green from center on the white balance wheel, and the colors of all the ladies muumuus came out beautiful. Posted a couple of images on my album page.

It's an outstanding but complex camera. You have to learn how to use it. It's not a point and shoot. I had some disappointments too, but I blame myself for those, not the camera. Review your menu settings and try again. Good luck.

I'm sure this has been commented on... but 1150 comments."Its stabilization is by no means class leading, but it works..."Can someone guide me to the class leading one.Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm does not offer stabilization in this class.If no competitor has it, or offer better, it is by default class-leading.It may not be the best stabilization system over all, but as far as I know it is class-leading.

UWA and Primes with stabilization isn't all that common, so I would say it has quite and advantage there.

The class leading stabilization in the A6500's range definitely comes from Olympus (for mid to high-end enthusiast-level mirrorless cameras). The Oly EM-5 Mk II, EM-1 Mk II, and the Pen-F all are testing confirmed to have at least two more stops of stabilization than the A6500. The A6500 does somewhat better in the pure IQ department than the Oly cameras, compliments of a larger and likely better engineered sensor/processor combination. However, for pure stabilization purposes, nobody beats Olympus in this or any other class of camera.

I have used Sony Mirrorless since the Nex 5n and Nex 7. The A6500 is a solid step forward. The Nex 7 was wonderful and with the A6000 still takes images of substantially equal quality to the A6500 in most conditions. But the A6500, having IBIS, much improved focus functions, and updated sensor does the job a little better and more consistently. I have used it with the Zeiss f1.8 24mm, the f1.8. 55 mm Sony /Zeiss, (full frame) and the f2.8, 90 mm Sony (also ff). The A mount dt 18-135 (f3.5 to 5.6) with the LAEA3 adapter, is sharp for a zoom lens with the IBIS but doesn't work with eye focus. Even with my unsteady hands, the IBIS makes the unstabilized primes and zooms work consistently well. I like the touchscreen focus. But you can't see the screen well enough to use it in sunlight. Compared to ff, this camera gives up very little Iq. in most situations (except low light). But greater depth of field and smallness of camera-plus-lens size are a definite plus.

I have been struggling with the A6000 until the zoom lense totally fell apart. It wasn't the camera, it was the Zony Zoom that gave me the hard time. It ceased to function totally. Now it shoud be fixed. here on my island, thee is no-one to fix it.Once I put primes on the camera, it performed very well. I have the 12mm rokinon, the 20mm pancake, the35 and the 55 mm Sony lenses. My original bad experiences were because of a faulty zoom lens.Now I have learned (finally) to use the various focusing and wxposure modes and it really does about the same as my 5D3. Almost is an important word here.I have learned to get the colors right, now I have the focusing, I figured out the PP work flow. I could now actually take this camera to any mission where long teles are not needed.

The 55mm is a jewel as is the rokinon 12. Canon EF 85L looks very good on the Sony if you focus it correctly. The metabones adapter...I will not say a bad word, but.

" The touch sensitivity of the rear screen can be used for your choice of two things: as an touchscreen for positioning the focus point or triggering focus and shutter, or as a touchpad, when the camera is held to your eye."

I think you have the 'shutter' release part wrong. AFAIK it will NOT release shutter as is the case with Olympus and Panasonic cameras. Only focus selection is possible. You still need to press the shutter button to get a shutter release.

Not really. You can use the touch screen for more than that. You can even use it to type in passwords. Go to the settings 'Touch Pad Area Set', and select 'Whole Screen'. Make sure your install the latest software update, Ver 1.04.

I got the a6000 looking forward to upgrade to a6500 anytime. But when it comes to video-stabilisation it seems the 6500 still can't compete with Olympus. And the image quality isn't really bad either...is the Olympus stabilisation really that good or rather sony's so bad as shown in the video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE2__Xlx8YoThat would be so annoying...

This sums up my experience with sports and Sony A series cameras, actually most mirrorless cameras and sports. Maybe instead of more points Sony will focus on getting the right point in focus. Chris Niccolls did a funny short video trying to shoot HS sports.

Can't understand DPreview Scoring Bars. In the Movie bar compared for example with Sony RX100 V you can see (unbelievable!) higher bar of RX100 V against the A6500. But when you compare Video stills with DP Comparison Tool you can clearly see that the clear winner in video is A6500. Can't trust this measure. Please fix it!

I'd phrase it differently... The A6500 and A6300 both get an 85% rating, and the A6500 has more features, yet the A6300 get a gold rating and the A6500 only gets a silver. What gives?? I can't help thinking DP's review/rating system is meaningless.

DPR explained it many times before. The score is the total of several mini scores in different categories. The award itself is what the reviewer(s) personally thought the camera brought anything worthwhile versus other competing models.

The written review of A6500 is already self explanatory on why DPR didn't give it the gold award (hint: overheating, typical Sony quirks and if course released too soon after the A6300).

The a6500 is a great little camera. I will take it on my next vacation. The image quality is no where near my 5Dsr or 7dMark II with my canon L or Sigma Arts lenses but I can get in in a big pocket!. The video is wonderful---ten times better than any of my other professional camera. It needs a pro quality E-mount 70-200 f2.8 and100-400 f5.6. Because of the size, putting a sharp but heavy G lenses takes a lot away from this nice little camera. It's blue tooth and Wi-Fy or not compatible with Apple products! This was a big disappointment. I was really surprised the first time I tried to send a photo form it to my iPhone to Facebook. I Had to take the photo over with my iPhone to publish a "right now" photo! Trying to find things in the menu is confusing compared to Canon and Nikon. The controls are just not intuitive. In spite of all my negative comments, this is a wonderful little camera that take great photos that you don't need to hire a Sherpa to carry!

Wow, that's the first I've heard/read about this limitation. I've been searching for a replacement to my 8 yr old 5DII and this feature is one I've been missing. But I wasn't aware of the iPhone limitation. Can someone confirm this please?

I used a6500 with ipad Air and iphone 6, perfectly fine and fairly easy to use as compare to others. I also use my mobile phone as remote trigger. It is compatible with most of Apple products with latest OS. Users need to download the playmemory app to operate through mobile phone or tablet

I'm pretty sure it would be the same wifi system as the a6000, and if so, it works with Apple devices. You just have to download the Sony PlayMemories app. Only limitation is it does not transfer RAW files, only JPEG

Sony A6500 new shutter "Tested" is 200,000 cycles which is 25 percent more than ALPHA 7M2 , or A 6300 or FUJI XT2. This is not given enough attention ... so in testing both in terms of the value of the camera!

I have a Nex6 and a 18-200 Sony lens, a 400mm manual focus Sigma, and some inherited Leica M3 lenses which was why I went for the CSC in the first place. I enjoy taking surf photography but find the slow zoom focus means often missing the shot, and the Elmar 135 F4 shakes a bit too much. So the a6500 faster focus with the Sony lens and the IBIS with old lenses sounds attractive. Is there a better option than the 6500?

After looking at most of the comments and this review. I believe most of you are stuck on DSLR!

This is a product and others like it that in many ways surpass DSLR!

I've used mirrorless for over 2 years now Sony A6000 and now A6500. With a big exhale I say this. If you're unwilling to try out the easy one hand operation, 16 plus focusing features, 100 in RAW buffer, and just about any lens you want just stick to DSLR. How come you're not willing to learn a new system?

Ready to learn a new system. Mirrorless--AND SHUTTERLESS--are the future. Problem is Sony is a bit late to the game. The majority of long term camera people are highly invested in lenses with Canon or Nikon mounts. If Sony really wanted to take business from those brands, the company would have its own fully compatible adapters for Canon EF/EFS lenses and Nikon lenses. If that existed now, I would have clicked over to B&H already and ordered the a6500. The existing adapters, however, from Metabones, Sigma, and others, seem to all have limitations and drawbacks. Too bad, too. Canon gave Sony still another opportunity, by introducing a crippled new mirrorless, the M5, with no 4K video and no IBIS. I'm ready to buy, but we've got A LOT of money tied up in Canon lenses (500F4L, 300F2.8L, 70-200F2.8, 17mmTSE, and on and on...and on.)

I have no concern about 4k video. However, this camera's in-body stabilization that works with or without in-lens stabilization, is why I cancelled my pre order for the Canon M5. Now, if someone can just make a reliable, fully functional EF/EFS to Sony E adapter, this is my new camera.

The most reliable adapter I've used so far is the sigma mc-11. It's also quite cheap. Combined with the a6300, which shares it's AF-System with the a6500, I felt focus speed was better than on my 5D mkII. Reliable enough for me to use it for a job. And if you have any Sigma lenses for EF-Mount even Eye-AF is supported on those. I used it without problems for 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 28mm 1.8 and even Tamron 24-70, 15-30....

Brechtlam, that is encouraging. The A6500, though, introduces IBIS, and that's another technology for an adapter to have to address. I've read another post where the IBIS in the 6500 does not work with the Sigma adapter and IS lenses, although it works with at least some non-stabilized lenses, and of course those are the ones that we're interested in getting stabilized by the body. The Canon 85/1.8 is a super candidate for IBIS, as are the 50 1.4 and 1.2, and some others as well. I'd really like to see a thorough test of lenses with the Sigma adapter, as well as the Metabones unit, on the 6500.

I've used all mentioned brands except for tokina and they were all acquiring focus fast and reliable. Maybe the canon primes have been a bit faster but as my Sigma and Tamron lenses are zooms it might be justified by their complex lens design compared to primes. I didn't use eye-af or alikes instead I simply used the cameras central af area so I don't know if it's true that eye-af is only supported by Sigma lenses. In general as I mentioned above, I was surprised by the speed of focus acquisition, surpassing that of my native Canon 5D mk II...

God..."The a6500, like many small cameras trying to shoot 4K video, is somewhat limited by its ability to dissipate heat.To help with this, the rear screen automatically dims when you shoot 4K footage, making it very difficult to shoot with, in bright light."

Hmmm....well I know one cam that NEVER ever overheated even in a smaller size version.

"In fact only Panasonic offers cameras near this price point with an equal degree of video features and tools. And while the Panasonics shoot lovely 4K video, the a6500 uses a larger sensor and can shoot in more extreme lighting while keeping noise levels low."

Well...that is the cam that does never overheat in the first place. But let's just mention it when it is not the best but only compare that brand, true to style, when it fares less well than the Sony...

Also: in more extreme lighting of the other kind (bright) you are getting into serious troubles if that is in warm weather. Overheating and nothing to see on the screen with Sony.

Panasonics use a 4k crop on their sensor for 4k video so there is significantly less data processing required.

I believe Samsung's H.265 actually requires more processing power than H.264, eventhough the files are smaller. Also, keep in mind that the NX1 downsamples the full sensor, similar to the Sonys, without any heating issues so it's most due to more efficient processors and the larger body helping with cooling too. The NX500 only records 4k with a crop, although no one knows if that's a technical limitation due to heating or product differentiation.

I don't own either but what is the attraction of the A6500 over the A77 II? It seems like mirrorless is all the hype these days but SLT is what is far more interesting to me for actual photography instruments from Sony.

One large attraction of the A6300/6500 over the A77II is better image quality. Besides that, it is better suited for shooting video.I have to agree that the A77II offers many advantages ergonomically. That's why I'm waiting for an E-mount version/body style like the A77 for 3 years now, but Sony seems to put PRO and Priority to FF E-mount these days while missing a whole segment by neglecting a PRO style E-mount APS-C system. But that is the downside of having to cater two mounts I guess.

I like the smallest kit in some situations. Have not used a Sony DSLR of any kind, though SLR/DSLR's were my norm. Including a D800E.

I travel every week for work. In the NEX/alpha APS-C line I have a tool that's small and light and delivers APS-C performance for my needs.

I can afford to buy practically any camera I wish, but for my purposes, there's no reason to look beyond Sony for mirrorless at this point. Sensor size and related performance trumps just about all. I really don't care about touchscreen yet. Maybe I will.

The price/performance ratio for Sony mirrorless is hard to beat if looked at objectively.

Oh the pathetic little enduring trolls love to bash Sony. Or those that have a Sony can't imagine anything produced in the last three years tops their current camera. As if they are so knowledgeable about IBIS and shoot non stop 2 hour long 4K videos. Sad really.

Shooting 4K video is my main interest. The a6500 LCD and EVF dimming when shooting 4K render this camera useless outdoors in bright light. This is not a Sony oversight, an error in design, but a deliberate business decision not to invest in R&D, I have no doubt. I have a work-around and it is to purchase a Lumix G85 (Gold Award) plus I get the benefit of no overheating problems plus many other more advanced features, plus I save significant money.

For me the Sony a6500 is a disappointment which reflects Sony's long term strategic non-commitment to this market segment. I must add my Sony a6000 still does a great job doing what it was designed to do.

The only lens problem that a6000/6300/6500 have is the lack of good mid range apsc zoom lens. There is nothing out there on the market. The f4 sony zooms suck bad..but besides from midrange zoom problem there is sh*t ton of great lenses out there.

if A6300/A6500 sell well, sooner or later 3rd party like Sigma would step inI am surprise it only make a MC11 and not same native lens like the 18-35 F1.8 art if made for E-mount it could be smaller than DSLR lens

there is money to be made as the demand is thereEven if Sony did abandon APS-C lens (still don't know if Sony would eventually care APS-C after somewhat done with FE) , 3rd party would step in

Why don't make lens for #1 mirrorless system, so few 3rd party opton now surprise me

Maybe because A6000 buying would not buy lens, if A6300/A6500 sell well than the game change

I traded my a6000 for a Fuji X-T10. No doubt, I've encountered the issue that Fuji X-Trans users face: namely waxy skin tones under LED lighting at high ISO. Aside from that, and a RAW ISO limit of 6400, the Fuji is a much more effective system than my Sony with the Sigma trio of Art DN lenses because it's PDAF.

The a6000 is a fantastic camera, but I let it go because there aren't enough Sony APs-C lenses. I specialize in low light stage photography, so I needed at least f2.8 lenses. The Sigma trio fulfilled that need, but are CDAF only on the a6000, so there's always a slight focusing delay compared to the Fuji, which is near instant to focus.

I've waited years for a standard f2.8 zoom lens, but the closest you get is the A-mount 16-50 version and the LA-Ea4 adapter, which simply didn't fit my needs.

I jumped over to Fuji for one main advantage: the JPEG rendering is so good that I rarely need to process using the RAW files. It saves me a lot of time honestly.

I do have a Nikon D750 as my main camera. I've used my a6000 as a backup for a couple of years now, but I really needed a fast zoom lens, which was why I ultimately switched over to Fuji. I had no real complaint with the Sony body in itself and absolutely hated selling the Sigma trio of lenses. they're lenses for their price point, and I can never recommend them enough. But the lack of PDAF on the a6000 means it's not really suited for my stage photography, though it's definitely given me no small amount of amazing photos in the last two years.

We like the Zeiss 16-70 that my son shoots with. Admittedly, it is overpriced, and not great. But it is a real step up from the kit lens. Sony needs to address the lack of APS-C walk around options, and buying a GM lens that costs twice the body is just silly. In any case, I would encourage folks to try the Zeiss. It ain't bad. if it was as good as the AMount 16-80 or the Sony 16-50 2.8, it would really be a home run. But it's just not quite there.

The Sony Alpha a6500: At this time, 48 people say they own it; 223 want it, and; 24 had it. I find it hard to fathom that 24 had it. If 24 did have it, they must have been sadly disappointed. Anyway, the Sony Alpha reminds me of the Minolta from which it is descended. I still use my Minolta as well as my Nikon.

Not true. They only gave a silver award to the 80D whereas it got top marks on all the other sites. The Sony is obviously far from perfect otherwise Sony wouldn't be churning out a new version every 8 months

Very steep premium price for the A6500. About a year ago I bought a second A6000 from one of the best-known online camera stores when the price was briefly dropped to $498 -- both as a backup and to minimize lens changing. I'd love to have the IBIS of the A6500 (IBIS was the main reason I went with Minolta once-upon-a-time) but not at that price.

Yay, another incremental upgrade obscenely priced. In the old days, new iterations of products carried better features in the same price, showcasing technological advancements, production streamlining etc. Not in the camera world apparently! Throw in a couple extra features, mark it up 50% and we're good to go.

Not iterations. Look to Canon for a classic example of iterations. These are different levels. Sony is just weird about naming. The A6000, A6300, and A6500 would be placed in the lineup like Nikon's D5300, D7200, and D500. Then again, Nikon's occasionally been weird with naming, too (D5300 -> D5500, D700 -> D750, etc.)

As I said, the same camera with IBIS. All the stuff you mention is what you'd expect from an incremental update on any new model. Nothing that justifies putting it on a higher tier or slapping that pricetag on. For me at least. Maybe for you it's worth every penny. In which case enjoy.

Well, most DSLRs (and higher end mirrorless cameras) have a dial front and back to control shutter speed and aperture. The A6x00 cameras have one dial at the top-back, and a control wheel on the back which is less traditional and probably not optimal.

So the A6xxx cameras have 2 control wheels just in different places.My RX10iii is set up like that and It doesn't bother me. I think the reviewers are trying hard to complain about something that isn't, IMO worth complaining about. One of the problems about reviewers in general is they do it so much and use so many cameras that they become overly concerned about picky details that the average consumer just doesn't care about. This goes for every brand across the board. The job of us readers is to take that into account and not get too bent out of shape about these criticisms because in the real world most of them don't matter.

Another area was in the criticism of the yellows. After checking it out I see the difference is very small and will require a direct A-B comparison to even see. In day to day use it will matter only to the most critical users but 95% of us won't care. Besides it probably can be corrected with minor AWB adjustments in the camera or, with RAW, on the computer.

I'm not saying these things because I'm a Sony user, which I am (A77ii, RX100, RX10iii), I say them because I see the same issues in the reviews of every camera by every brand. It's the reviewers job to point out issues of concern but it's the reader's job to decide which issues matter to them. It would also be nice if the fanboys of other brands wouldn't jump on every issue and act like it makes the camera an unusable piece of junk. ;-) That gets very annoying.

Uh, have you actually bothered to compare the IQ with anything else? Lines up nicely with the D500, D7200, and X-Pro2/X-T2. Can't really ask for more in terms of APS-C. All companies except Canon are using similar production techniques now, so the playing field is pretty much level.

Also, it's funny that so many people love the NEX-7, since people were complaining about the A6000 that it was difficult to tell the top dials apart. People were using the wrong one to switch things. Yet, it never was an issue with the NEX-7. People just looking for problems that don't actually exist.

2016 was pretty good for high-end ILCs, as we'd expect from a Photokina year. Click through to read more about this year's crop of enthusiast and professional ILCs, and for your chance to vote on which was best. Vote now

What a difference eight months can make. The Sony a6500, predictably, has both a lot in common with the a6300, but also adds some impressive updates. Take a look at what an extra $400 in sticker price really gets you. Read more

The a6500 is the new top-end model in Sony's line of APS-C cameras, offering competitive high-speed burst shooting, in-body image stabilization and a touchscreen. Take a look at how it looks (and how its 11 fps shutter sounds) in our hands-on video. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

The Edelkrone DollyONE is an app-controlled, motorized flat surface camera dolly. The FlexTILT Head 2 is a lightweight head that extends, tilts and pans. They aren't cheap, but when combined these two products provide easy camera mounting, re-positioning and movement either for video work or time lapse photography.

Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? Well, the GR III has a modern 24MP APS-C sensor paired with an incredibly sharp lens and fits into a shirt pocket. But it's not without its caveats, so read our full review to get the low-down on Ricoh's powerful new compact.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

The HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW is a high quality standard prime lens for Ricoh's full-frame Pentax DSLRs. Ricoh has made great claims about its pro-grade construction and excellent sharpness – how does it stack up?

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.